From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Fri Sep 17 12:12:32 1999 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (root@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23753 for ; Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:12:32 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id LAA16974 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:51:28 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:51:28 -0500 Message-Id: <199909171651.LAA16974@lists.io.com> From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #1332 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Friday, September 17 1999 Volume 01 : Number 1332 In this digest: Re: IN> In Nomine Character Generator Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> A Word... IN> Re: Kyrio Questions Re: IN> A Word... RE: IN> In Nomine Character Generator IN> Those pesky Ethereals IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... Re: IN> A Word... Re: IN> A Word... Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals Re: IN> Speaking of noise... Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals Re: IN> Speaking of noise... Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... Re: IN> Re: Kyrio Questions Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: IN> A Word... Re: IN> Speaking of noise... RE: IN> Primordial Angels ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 17:17:23 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine Character Generator At 3:59 PM -0400 9/16/99, Chris Bergstresser wrote: > Finally, I'd like to talk to someone from SJG about copyright issues. http://www.sjgames.com/general/gm-aid-license.html (There's a contact address in there, too, and all the data is good stuff to read. And re-read.) >Basically, I'd like to include descriptive text about the various skills, >songs, Superiors, etc . . . so they're available for browsing in the >character generator. I think I can nearly guarentee the answer will be some form of "No." However, there are other options! Check out http://www.io.com/~lcowper/InNomine/ -- they got permission to have the information that they have up, and it's possible (even likely, if you ask properly) you could get permission for something similiar. You could also talk with Lynette about the process she went through, to get that data approved. I think you'll find that it wasn't difficult, since both parties were cooperating to protect SJ Games' copyrights. > Obviously, there are some potential copyright issues >involved (even though I'll likely release the designer as freeware), Ahead of time note here -- freeware _doesn't change copyright violations_. It just means you can't be sued for the profits you made. The law still obligates the owner of the copyright to sue you to stop you from doing it, and possibly collect damages _whether you made a profit or not_. That's one of the most common misconceptions about copyright and trademark, that it's "okay" if you don't make money from it. It's wrong, and I'd hate for a good resource to be tied up in bad feeling just because of a misconception! (And, as my job _depends_ on intellectual property rights, there is no way in heck you can get me to change my mind here... O:> ) - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:34:33 +0100 (BST) From: maya@tcp.co.uk (GR Cogman) Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels >also, there is a French sequel of sorts to In Nomine (the name escapes me) >that is set in the future and does deal with some of that as far as I've >been told (sorry, don't know French, but I will learn it just to read the >original texts) >- Dennis H, Groome V "Amo Nympham" >ICQ: 11430261 There is - it's called _Stella Inquisitoris_, and is very dark indeed. The Stella Vaticanum (directly ruled by Archangels and human Apostles) is a repressive dictatorship, while the Dunkle Reik is an alliance of worlds where each Prince has a few solar systems of his own, and conditions vary from planet to planet. It's great fun to read, though I don't think the SJG/IN could ever develop that way. And I strongly recommend reading the original French INS/MV stuff - which is _still_ being published! Latest and just out is _Habeas Corpus_, a nice book which purports to have three scenarios, a mini-campaign, and the introduction of the Internet to the Archangelic Council (as witness the translated quote below) ... Date : 03/05/98 05:31 GMT Subject : Library From : hotline@NtD.fr To : Jean@NtD.fr We've already had to handle 400 help requests from the Council. The Archangels and their subordinates are nothing more than a load of newbies who've never even read the manual! Novalis alone has called us 126 times: he wants a site with "psychedelic Javascripts to get my servitors in the right mood for surfing" (I quote). We need more personnel! Fast! Anyhow. Strongly recommended. - --- Genevieve Cogman maya@tcp.co.uk `Ce n'est qu'en travaillant que les ides viennent' (Sade) ("It is only through working that ideas come") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 16:48:05 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A Word... At 15:48 -0400 9/16/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >At 3:02 PM -0400 9/16/99, Walter Milliken wrote: >>But Yves himself is also stated in canon to have a strong interest in >>philosphy and theology, so Raphael may have left that behind when she was >>promoted, keeping only the more "down to earth" social sciences. > >Mm, I don't know -- Philosophy was considered the primus of >knowledge. All things broke down from Philosophy -- which is why to >this day the Ph.D. is considered the highest academic rank, and >scientists have "Doctorates of Philosophy" in Physics, for example. >Philosophy and knowledge were the same, and philosophical debate >informed all knowledge. I think we're running into different definitions of philosophy now: the old definition, used by the Greeks, etc., and the more modern definition. I agree with your description, given the old definition, but I was using it in its more modern sense of "How do we know what we know, and how do we go about knowing things?" (If I can be allowed to capsulize it so horribly....) In that, rather more metaphysical sense, it would seem to fall very much under Yves, as the Namer of Things, and the entity most interested in theological issues. In the classical Greek sense, yes, everything Jean does also falls under philosophy, at least on the scientific, as opposed to engineering, side. But the person asking the question was referring to a modern university philosophy department, and in a modern context, the word doesn't really mean what it did to the classical Greeks. So I was interpreting it in its narrow sense. >>Once Raphael was gone, it pretty much had to have fallen under Yves, if >>it wasn't before. > >There I disagree. When Raphael was gone, much of her work fell to >Jean, according to Canon, as the flash of insight. I think the categorization and storage of knowledge, yes, but not necessarily the areas of study -- most of the "soft sciences" seem firmly lodged under Yves in canon. And Yves people also are concerned with the collection/storage/categorization of knowledge. So my view, which I think fits with some future canon, is that Rapheal's areas were split between Jean and Yves. Yes, Jean does have to have some understanding of human social structures to evaluate the impacts of various scientific theories and technologies. But I don't see that as his focus -- he probably picked up those people of Raphael's who specialized in the history and social impacts of scientific thought and technology. But I can't see him worrying about the more abstruse areas of philosophy -- those really seem to be Yves'. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 18:35:40 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Re: Kyrio Questions At 5:46 PM -0400 9/16/99, andersonb@mindspring.com wrote: >When a Kyrio possess a host who's Corporeal forces (and Strength and >Agility) do you use? The Kyriotate's, no matter who has the higher. Corporeal Forces of the host equal the "vessel level" when calculating hit points for the Kyrio-in-that-host. Corporeal Forces are not "divided" between hosts. Every host has access to the same Forces and stats -- the Kyriotate is one being in many bodies, and retains this "cohesion." If a Kyrio has 3 Corporeal Forces, then anything that pertains to Corporeal Forces of the angel will use 3, no matter how many hosts it currently has. >Lastly, how far >apart can two possessed hosts be? In GURPS IN, we had to give them a limit -- I think a solar system or two. In In Nomine, as far as the GM thinks is reasonable. If the Kyrio is spread between realms, it acts at half speed (for 2 realms) or 1/3rd speed (for all 3). I.e., in 2 realms, it can act only every other turn. In 3, it acts ever 3rd round. - --emccoy@nh.ultranet.com // arcangel@io.com In Nomine Line Editor GURPS, Roleplayers, In Nomine stuff; Art: http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 17:40:01 -0500 From: Lance Hunter Subject: Re: IN> A Word... Well, I would go farther than all of you, that philosophy would be under no archangel (or prince), that instead it would be one of it's own. Under it would be angels(or demons) of aestetics, epistomology, metaphysics(which would be an interesting angel), nagging questions, and so on. (Yes the spelling of that entire last sentance is questionable, but let's move on.) Perhaps God reserves philosophy, keeps it from being assigned because of it's possible use to discern His very nature. (After all, he got a little scared about the whole Tree of Life thing in Eden- Gen 3:22) Perhaps the Word is so powerful that those who serve it could break into their own side in the war. Or perhaps, because philosophy is how man attempts to seek knowledge, how he reaches conclusions and sets his own rules, perhaps the word has no place for celestials, it's Man's word. (Of course then, why are there so many celestials doing so much philosophising?) Who knows... At 04:48 PM 9/16/99 -0400, you wrote: >At 15:48 -0400 9/16/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >>At 3:02 PM -0400 9/16/99, Walter Milliken wrote: >>>But Yves himself is also stated in canon to have a strong interest in >>>philosphy and theology, so Raphael may have left that behind when she was >>>promoted, keeping only the more "down to earth" social sciences. >> >>Mm, I don't know -- Philosophy was considered the primus of >>knowledge. All things broke down from Philosophy -- which is why to >>this day the Ph.D. is considered the highest academic rank, and >>scientists have "Doctorates of Philosophy" in Physics, for example. >>Philosophy and knowledge were the same, and philosophical debate >>informed all knowledge. > >I think we're running into different definitions of philosophy now: >the old definition, used by the Greeks, etc., and the more modern >definition. I agree with your description, given the old definition, >but I was using it in its more modern sense of "How do we know what >we know, and how do we go about knowing things?" (If I can be allowed >to capsulize it so horribly....) > >In that, rather more metaphysical sense, it would seem to fall very much >under Yves, as the Namer of Things, and the entity most interested in >theological issues. > >In the classical Greek sense, yes, everything Jean does also falls under >philosophy, at least on the scientific, as opposed to engineering, >side. But the person asking the question was referring to a modern >university philosophy department, and in a modern context, the word >doesn't really mean what it did to the classical Greeks. So I was >interpreting it in its narrow sense. > >>>Once Raphael was gone, it pretty much had to have fallen under Yves, if >>>it wasn't before. >> >>There I disagree. When Raphael was gone, much of her work fell to >>Jean, according to Canon, as the flash of insight. > >I think the categorization and storage of knowledge, yes, but not >necessarily the areas of study -- most of the "soft sciences" seem >firmly lodged under Yves in canon. And Yves people also are concerned >with the collection/storage/categorization of knowledge. So my view, >which I think fits with some future canon, is that Rapheal's areas >were split between Jean and Yves. > >Yes, Jean does have to have some understanding of human social structures >to evaluate the impacts of various scientific theories and technologies. >But I don't see that as his focus -- he probably picked up those people of >Raphael's who specialized in the history and social impacts of scientific >thought and technology. But I can't see him worrying about the more >abstruse areas of philosophy -- those really seem to be Yves'. > > >---Walter > - -- Lance Hunter "I knew in my heart by pure logic that any man who calls himself a religious leader and owns more than one suit is a hustler as long as there is someone in the world who has no suit at all." -Lenny Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:19:51 -0400 From: "Chris Bergstresser" Subject: RE: IN> In Nomine Character Generator > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > [mailto:owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com]On Behalf Of Elizabeth McCoy > Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 5:17 PM > To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine Character Generator > > > At 3:59 PM -0400 9/16/99, Chris Bergstresser wrote: > > > Finally, I'd like to talk to someone from SJG about copyright issues. > > http://www.sjgames.com/general/gm-aid-license.html > (There's a contact address in there, too, and all the data is good > stuff to read. And re-read.) Great pointer. Thanks everyone who pointed it out. > >Basically, I'd like to include descriptive text about the various skills, > >songs, Superiors, etc . . . so they're available for browsing in the > >character generator. > > I think I can nearly guarentee the answer will be some form of "No." > However, there are other options! Check out > http://www.io.com/~lcowper/InNomine/ -- they got permission to have > the information that they have up, and it's possible (even likely, if you > ask properly) you could get permission for something similiar. I don't know how useful that would be. What I'm tired of, in designing NPCs (or even using pregenerated ones), is the constant flipping through the book to look up skill X and song Y, to figure out which would be useful for a given character to have, or if player Z decides to roll against it, what it's likely to do. Having this *built into* the character generator is a big time-saver for me, frankly. Particularly one that can customize the display based on the supplements I'm using. > You > could also talk with Lynette about the process she went through, to > get that data approved. I think you'll find that it wasn't difficult, > since both parties were cooperating to protect SJ Games' copyrights. > > > Obviously, there are some potential copyright issues > >involved (even though I'll likely release the designer as freeware), > > Ahead of time note here -- freeware _doesn't change copyright > violations_. > It just means you can't be sued for the profits you made. The law still > obligates the owner of the copyright to sue you to stop you from > doing it, > and possibly collect damages _whether you made a profit or not_. I'm well aware of what copyright does and doesn't cover. I was just pointing out that my motives were altruistic. - -- Chris ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:18:21 -0400 From: Douglas Muir Subject: IN> Those pesky Ethereals 1) If an ethereal does damage to a human (or whatever), it makes noise in the Symphony. Right? 2) Someone remind me what happens when an Ethereal's vessel is killed? Doug M. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 17:41:40 PDT From: "liam astley" Subject: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... >Why wouldn't they be out in other portions of Creation? I don't >think >Canon states that Earth is the sum total of Creation. > hmmm, in my campaign I'd definitely keep it to Earth. I know IN makes some concessions to science, but I prefer the old Biblical view as the world being the centre of the universe, so to speak. alien races are a bit of an unnecessary add-on. I think our planet (not to mention the ethereal and celestial planes) provides enough plot material without sticking in some dodgy sci-fi mishmash liam Kyriotate of Stupid Dogs ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:21:30 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> A Word... At 5:40 PM -0500 9/16/99, Lance Hunter wrote: >Well, I would go farther than all of you, that philosophy would be under no >archangel (or prince), that instead it would be one of it's own. Under it >would be angels(or demons) of aestetics, epistomology, metaphysics(which >would be an interesting angel), nagging questions, and so on. (Yes the >spelling of that entire last sentance is questionable, but let's move on.) >Perhaps God reserves philosophy, keeps it from being assigned because of >it's possible use to discern His very nature. (After all, he got a little >scared about the whole Tree of Life thing in Eden- Gen 3:22) Perhaps the >Word is so powerful that those who serve it could break into their own side >in the war. Or perhaps, because philosophy is how man attempts to seek >knowledge, how he reaches conclusions and sets his own rules, perhaps the >word has no place for celestials, it's Man's word. (Of course then, why are >there so many celestials doing so much philosophising?) >Who knows... Oh, no doubt there's an Angel of Philosophy -- the big question is whether it's a Servitor of Jean or Yves. Or, if it's a Minor Archangel, who it was a Servitor of before? (Which may, of course, be Raphael.) Hm... the Angel of Philosophy. A Seraph -- as a seeker after truth? A Mercurian, as one who explores the nature of man? An Elohite, as one who rises above emotion to pure thought? A Malakite, who enjoys pummeling Post-Modernists....? - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:51:51 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> A Word... At 4:48 PM -0400 9/16/99, Walter Milliken wrote: >At 15:48 -0400 9/16/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: > >At 3:02 PM -0400 9/16/99, Walter Milliken wrote: > >>But Yves himself is also stated in canon to have a strong interest in > >>philosphy and theology, so Raphael may have left that behind when she was > >>promoted, keeping only the more "down to earth" social sciences. > > > >Mm, I don't know -- Philosophy was considered the primus of > >knowledge. All things broke down from Philosophy -- which is why to > >this day the Ph.D. is considered the highest academic rank, and > >scientists have "Doctorates of Philosophy" in Physics, for example. > >Philosophy and knowledge were the same, and philosophical debate > >informed all knowledge. > >I think we're running into different definitions of philosophy now: >the old definition, used by the Greeks, etc., and the more modern >definition. I agree with your description, given the old definition, >but I was using it in its more modern sense of "How do we know what >we know, and how do we go about knowing things?" (If I can be allowed >to capsulize it so horribly....) > >In that, rather more metaphysical sense, it would seem to fall very much >under Yves, as the Namer of Things, and the entity most interested in >theological issues. I can *certainly* see this. Though IMC there is yadda yadda [trimmed because well, it's not very interesting.] > >>Once Raphael was gone, it pretty much had to have fallen under Yves, if > >>it wasn't before. > > > >There I disagree. When Raphael was gone, much of her work fell to > >Jean, according to Canon, as the flash of insight. > >I think the categorization and storage of knowledge, yes, but not >necessarily the areas of study -- most of the "soft sciences" seem >firmly lodged under Yves in canon. And Yves people also are concerned >with the collection/storage/categorization of knowledge. So my view, >which I think fits with some future canon, is that Rapheal's areas >were split between Jean and Yves. Absolutely. However, I see more of the 'motivating and promoting' force of evolution of knowledge being Jean's end, while more of the collecting, categorizing and disseminating of knowledge already found is Yves's. Note this can support the idea of Yves as Patron of Philosophy very easily. However, I think it supports the idea of Jean as the Patron of Evolution of Methods of Thinking as well. And I assume that "soft sciences" means most humanities and the social sciences in your definition? The reason I ask is this: Critical Theory in literature is, for all intents and purposes, philosophy. (Especially when you get into Modernist and Post-Modernist Lit Crit, but even going back to the Biographia Literaria or further back to Plato you find Literary Criticism and philosophy converging.) Now, while the creation of literature is clearly under Eli's word, the criticism of that literature is a motivating force of philosophical thought. No problem there. If Yves is the patron of Philosophy, clearly he's the Patron of Literary Criticism. Heck, he's got that Library, right? Linguistics, on the other hand, is clearly the science of language. It's concerned with the ways language breaks down, the way information is conveyed, the way the human mind creates patterns that can be replicated for the transfer of information. All right, Jean is clearly the Patron of Linguistics. So. Who's in charge of Linguistic Critical Theory? >Yes, Jean does have to have some understanding of human social structures >to evaluate the impacts of various scientific theories and technologies. >But I don't see that as his focus -- he probably picked up those people of >Raphael's who specialized in the history and social impacts of scientific >thought and technology. But science and technology as a seperate discipline is a relatively recent thing. Or are we saying they seperated essentially when Raphael died? - -- Eric Alfred Burns | | now with web site content! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 20:57:12 -0500 From: "Amo Nympham" Subject: Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals 1) yes 2) the same thing when a celestial vessel is killed. one fresh corpse, and the ethereal goes back to his natural plane and stays there until he can gain enough power to return. - -----Original Message----- From: Douglas Muir To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Date: Thursday, September 16, 1999 6:26 PM Subject: IN> Those pesky Ethereals > >1) If an ethereal does damage to a human (or whatever), it makes noise >in the Symphony. Right? > >2) Someone remind me what happens when an Ethereal's vessel is killed? > > >Doug M. > > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 00:43:31 -0400 From: "Eddie" Subject: Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals According to Canon There is a chance if their Vessel was killed they to would Die. As if they were killed in the Ethereal Plane. In my game what I do is make their death just like if they were a Celestial. I have this way, so people who want to play Ethereals, have it a little easier. - ----- Original Message ----- From: Douglas Muir To: Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 7:18 PM Subject: IN> Those pesky Ethereals > > 1) If an ethereal does damage to a human (or whatever), it makes noise > in the Symphony. Right? > > 2) Someone remind me what happens when an Ethereal's vessel is killed? > > > Doug M. > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:57:13 -0700 From: EDG Subject: Re: IN> Speaking of noise... At 06:13 PM 9/14/99 -0500, you wrote: >that's about 5000 points of disturbance from death alone, not even starting >to count collateral damage. but bombs usually don't kill that many. in >fact, the one against the World Trade Center killed under 100 people IIRC (i >could be wrong on taht one. anyone got a number on average bomb death?) It's eminently possible to take down an entire school (although unless you use a nuke you won't get everyone). It just takes a lot of work. This is as much a question as it is an answer: I remember reading somewhere that killing humans "within range" of each other, so to speak, caused disturbance to multiply itself. (I think it was in the main book - but as "disturbance" isn't really in the index, and I only spent about two minutes looking where I /thought/ it was - I can't find it.) The example I recall involved three humans being killed: the disturbance from the first was 10 (plus damage), the second was 20 (plus damage) and the third was 30 (plus damage), for a total of 60 (plus damage). Killing 500 people, using that rule, creates a /lot/ more than 5000 points of disturbance. (Specifically, it's [(10) + 2(10) + 3(10) + ... + 499(10) + 500(10)], or 1,252,500 points (plus damage!), if my program works properly.) Another noise question, mostly a curious nitpick: In Nomine, like pretty much every other numeric RPG, allows for much more damage to be /dealt/ than is actually /inflicted/. If my celestial deals 20 points of damage (falling house) to a mortal target with 12 HP ("stupid witch."), how many points of disturbance does that make? 10 + 3, since it took 3 4-hit segments to reduce her hits to zero? 10 + 3 + (Str/4), since she actually /took/ that much damage before really truly dying? Or 10 + 5, since I did 20 points of damage? - -EDG Back in black. - --- EDG, Mercurian of Lightning ist Archives, Angel of Information Dissemination edg@gamingoutpost.com The Gaming Outpost - www.gamingoutpost.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:00:24 +0000 From: "Leath Sheales" Subject: Re: IN> Those pesky Ethereals Eddie wrote: > According to Canon There is a chance if their Vessel was killed they to > would Die. As if they were killed in the Ethereal Plane. In my game what > I do is make their death just like if they were a Celestial. I have this > way, so people who want to play Ethereals, have it a little easier. They don't quite 'die'. When an Ethereal has a vessel killed, they are sent back to their home 'territory' (basically any haven they feel is safe, since they don't have celestial Hearts) in a state of Trauma. If they fail their rolls to recover from Trauma (using the same rules as celestials), they lose a Force. In this way, if they can not leave Trauma, they eventually simply fade away. Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 06:10:36 +0100 (BST) From: Warsinger Subject: Re: IN> Speaking of noise... On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, EDG wrote: > > Killing 500 people, using that rule, creates a /lot/ more than 5000 points > of disturbance. (Specifically, it's [(10) + 2(10) + 3(10) + ... + 499(10) > + 500(10)], or 1,252,500 points (plus damage!), if my program works properly.) I remember that from the rule book too - but I'm not entirely sure it makes sense -surely Celestial A hearing the noise would hear Death 1, then Death 2 would add to this, making it louder and so on - straight linear progression. How exactly does the disturbance interact so that goes up so much more? > > Another noise question, mostly a curious nitpick: In Nomine, like pretty > much every other numeric RPG, allows for much more damage to be /dealt/ > than is actually /inflicted/. If my celestial deals 20 points of damage > (falling house) to a mortal target with 12 HP ("stupid witch."), how many > points of disturbance does that make? 10 + 3, since it took 3 4-hit > segments to reduce her hits to zero? 10 + 3 + (Str/4), since she actually > /took/ that much damage before really truly dying? Or 10 + 5, since I did > 20 points of damage? > First glance I said no but then hmm - depends if hitting a dead corpse counts - which given it is an inanimate object on the corporeal plane being hit by something not native to that plane it should do. It's odd what logic does sometimes. Warsinger Cute and fluffy....(with claws) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 01:32:18 EDT From: JadePsion@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... In a message dated 9/16/99 5:45:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, esp_horsepie@hotmail.com writes: > I think our planet (not to mention the ethereal and > celestial planes) provides enough plot material without sticking in some > dodgy sci-fi mishmash Well, I agree about the providing enough plot material... But that said, I'm currently playing in an _In Nomine_, _Trinity_, _Traveller_ crossover/homebrew system which is probably one of the most enjoyable games I've ever played. Playing a celestial in a ship full of mortal psions has been a wonderfully thought-provoking experience for both myself and the other players (who don't yet know that my character is an angel; they just know he's not a "normal" psi). It's really causing us to consider the questions of what is good, what is evil, what is "equitable" retribution for sins (since I'm playing a Malakite of Gabriel), what is the nature of compassion and how important is it, and who decides what good and evil is. Cherie Erwin Misha, Malakite of Gabriel, in service to Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 01:32:17 EDT From: JadePsion@aol.com Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels In a message dated 9/16/99 3:11:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time, maya@tcp.co.uk writes: > And I strongly recommend reading the original French INS/MV stuff - which is > _still_ being published! Anyone have ordering information on the original? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 02:24:45 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... At 1:32 AM -0400 9/17/99, JadePsion@aol.com wrote: >....and who decides what good and evil is. I do. I called dibs. - -- Eric Alfred Burns It was then I felt my heart break like a in-sabre@annotations.com fragile Scooby Snack upon the harsh teeth of http://www.annotations.com Reality -- and it's been broken ever since. http://www.annotations.com/~journal --Johnny Bravo ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 09:39:32 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels Re: _Stella Inquisitoris_: No, it doesn't sound like a likely development from SJG's IN. As I've mentioned before, I think GURPS Lensman would be an easy SF crossover for IN. It's already a cosmic battle of good vs. evil. All you really have to do is: (1) Decide if each homeworld gets its own crew of Archangels, or if some, or all Archangels have cosmic jurisdictions (and ditto for Demon Princes). (2) Decide how the Superiors relate to Arisia and Edorre. Are these whole races of Soldiers, or just mass "Roles" assumed by the Celestials themselves? Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 09:40:52 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Re: IN- A Disturbance in the Force... JadePsion@aol.com wrote: > But that said, I'm currently playing in an _In Nomine_, _Trinity_, > _Traveller_ crossover/homebrew system which is probably one of the > most enjoyable games I've ever played. Have you brought any aliens into the mix yet? I know Traveller has plenty of them. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:40:02 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Re: Kyrio Questions At 18:35 -0400 9/16/99, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >>Lastly, how far >>apart can two possessed hosts be? > >In GURPS IN, we had to give them a limit -- I think a solar system or two. >In In Nomine, as far as the GM thinks is reasonable. Actually, I think I may have removed this restriction in later versions of the Kyrio resonance. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:55:18 +0100 From: hjalkar@redbrick.dcu.ie (Kevin Walsh) Subject: Re: IN> Primordial Angels On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 04:09:04PM -0500, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > Okay, that makes sense. Of the "nature angels," it seems the > inorganic elements -- fire, water(?), earth, and air -- Gabriel, > the late Oannes, David, and Janus -- are all primordial, I think. Actually, Janus is considerably younger than the rest of the Superiors representing inorganic elements. Apparently he got his Word through creating his Kyriotate attunement, allowing Celestials to manifest as wind, making him quite possibly a fair bit younger than the Earth. Kevin Walsh, Balseraph of Nitpicking, Demon of Off-Topic Trivia. - -- "These roleplayers wouldn't know a convincing society if it hanged them under an obscure section of its legal code." Martin Lloyd. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:10:19 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> A Word... At 21:51 -0400 9/16/99, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >Absolutely. However, I see more of the 'motivating and promoting' >force of evolution of knowledge being Jean's end, while more of the >collecting, categorizing and disseminating of knowledge already found >is Yves's. Actually, the way I view it, Jean is responsible for all knowledge-seeking pertaining to the physical corporeal universe, Raphael was responsible for that pertaining to human behavior, and Yves is responsible for the promotion of knowledge and understanding as a way for all beings to reach their Destiny, under the theory that perfect knowledge = God, and those who seek knowledge are working to move closer to Him. You could maybe divide them up as Corporeal Knowledge (Jean), Ethereal Knowledge (Raphael), and Celestial Knowledge (Yves). With Rafe's death, I would expect her duties and servitors got divided between Jean and Yves, with the lion's share going to Yves. >Note this can support the idea of Yves as Patron of Philosophy very >easily. However, I think it supports the idea of Jean as the Patron >of Evolution of Methods of Thinking as well. Possibly, though don't forget that many Words are fuzzy enough to fit under several Superiors. Quite possibly it would have wound up with whoever had a servitor who best promoted the concept, first. This is much the same sort of problem as trying to pick a Superior for the Angel of Inspiration -- that Word fits easily under Gabriel, Eli, or Jean, depending on the particular emphasis it has. >And I assume that "soft sciences" means most humanities and the >social sciences in your definition? Yes, pretty much. Anything that studies human behavior or culture, as opposed to the physical universe. I'm not sure where I'd put pure mathematics, since it really falls under neither. Given its stronger association with "hard" science, I'd tend to put it under Jean. >Linguistics, on the other hand, is clearly the science of language. >It's concerned with the ways language breaks down, the way >information is conveyed, the way the human mind creates patterns that >can be replicated for the transfer of information. All right, Jean >is clearly the Patron of Linguistics. I could argue either Jean or Rafe for this one -- I don't think it's that clear-cut. Linguistics, by and large, is primarily related to how humans think, which in my model would have put it more under Raphael. Those places where it crosses with neurology, computer languages, artificial intelligence, and communication with alien races would have a strong coupling to Jean, though. >So. Who's in charge of Linguistic Critical Theory? Personally, I'd put any sort of literary criticism firmly on the demonic side, probably under Malphas.... But I'm an engineer, and you're way out of anything in my experience. So my personal viewpoint is decidedly subjective. >But science and technology as a seperate discipline is a relatively >recent thing. In human terms, yes, but not necessarily by angelic evolution. I believe Jean is stated in one or more of the history pieces to have always been in charge of the physical forces of the universe. Then, when humans evolved, he also apparently acquired oversight over their evolution of understanding of those forces. How *humans* at various times have categorized things is largely irrelevant from the celestial viewpoint. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:25:46 -0400 From: Walter Milliken Subject: Re: IN> Speaking of noise... At 0:57 -0400 9/17/99, EDG wrote: >This is as much a question as it is an answer: I remember reading somewhere >that killing humans "within range" of each other, so to speak, caused >disturbance to multiply itself. (I think it was in the main book - but as >"disturbance" isn't really in the index, and I only spent about two minutes >looking where I /thought/ it was - I can't find it.) The example I recall >involved three humans being killed: the disturbance from the first was 10 >(plus damage), the second was 20 (plus damage) and the third was 30 (plus >damage), for a total of 60 (plus damage). I think it's simply additive -- each new disturbance adds to the original, but you don't add the prior disturbance in *again*. I believe the point is that while the total disturbance from a set of events always totals to the same amount, if the events are coupled together in the Symphony, you get a big peak of noise, rather than a lot of small, independent noises that happened to happen at the same time. A physical analogy would be to light -- normal light sources are incoherent, and the photons interfere with each other as much as they reinforce each other. So the light from a 100w light bulb isn't very strong. However, light from a laser is coherent; each photon reinforces each other photon. So the light from a 100w laser is *very* powerful. Even though the energy output is the same for both. Unrelated disturbances are light the light bulb -- they damp out into the background noise very quickly. Related disturbances are like the laser -- they reinforce each other, making a signal that stands out from the background noise *very* distinctly. >Another noise question, mostly a curious nitpick: In Nomine, like pretty >much every other numeric RPG, allows for much more damage to be /dealt/ >than is actually /inflicted/. If my celestial deals 20 points of damage >(falling house) to a mortal target with 12 HP ("stupid witch."), how many >points of disturbance does that make? 10 + 3, since it took 3 4-hit >segments to reduce her hits to zero? 10 + 3 + (Str/4), since she actually >/took/ that much damage before really truly dying? Or 10 + 5, since I did >20 points of damage? I believe 10 + 3 + (Str/4) is correct -- it's the amount of actual damage *done* that matters. That is, what would have to be healed again before the target was back to full hits. Once you reach death, I don't think additional damage to the body counts. Consider the following: Klutziel fires a gun at a Hellsworn fleeing in a boat. In theory, the gun is going to do X damage. However, Klutziel manages to miss, with the bullet going into the water, so nothing is really damaged. So no disturbance. - ---Walter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:49:29 -0400 From: "Chris Bergstresser" Subject: RE: IN> Primordial Angels > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com > [mailto:owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com]On Behalf Of Kevin Walsh > > Actually, Janus is considerably younger than the rest of the Superiors > representing inorganic elements. Apparently he got his Word through > creating his Kyriotate attunement, allowing Celestials to manifest as > wind, making him quite possibly a fair bit younger than the Earth. That doesn't make him younger -- it just means that he received his word later. He certainly seems to fit in with Gabriel, David, and Oannes -- all strong, primordial archangels, with very direct ideas on how to influence creation. If I had to ballpark the order they were created in, I'd peg Gabriel as the youngest. Oannes and Janus are probably the elders; the Bible starts with the presence of God as wind upon the face of the water. - -- Chris ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1332 ******************************** The material here is (C) 1999 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.